ONE WAY OUT OF ENDLESS DRUG WAR

It's come to this. Meth addicts across the country are stealing fire
hydrants -- and every other conceivable form of "scrap" metal from
irrigation systems to gravestone plaques to the catalytic converter
of your Chevy --to finance their addiction.

States and local communities have passed all kinds of legislation,
the toughest of all in Oregon, to restrict the sale of
pseudo-ephedrine and other "precursor" drugs in order to combat the
scourge of "home cooking." And many jurisdictions are considering (or
have passed) legislation requiring scrap metal buyers and sellers to
identify themselves, record sales, and to submit, upon request, said
information to the local police.

Yet every time a kitchen (or motel room or car trunk) lab is shut
down another crops up to take its place, ensuring the continued
presence of toxic and explosive chemicals -- and grave dangers to the
cookers and their families (too often including young children),
emergency responders, and entire neighborhoods.

Even those communities that have enjoyed some success in limiting the
number of homegrown labs have been unable to wipe out illegal
methamphetamine use. The drug, imported from other jurisdictions,
especially from Mexico these days, continues to flood the illicit
market, and to feed methamphetamine addiction.

One thing we know about addicts? They'll prostitute themselves, sell
drugs, and/or steal from you and me in order to finance their
addiction. The most common source of their income, by far, is theft.
My burglary detectives in Seattle told me in the late nineties that
upwards of 90 percent of their cases involved suspects who broke into
houses, garages and automobiles, ripping off valuables and fencing
the property for 20 cents on the dollar. Or a nickel (those fire
hydrants in California netted the crooks only five dollars worth of brass).

The answer? End drug prohibition. Legalize, tax, regulate, and
control all drugs, not only meth.

Think about it. The legal prohibition of alcohol failed not only to
curb its use, it created an entire criminal industry, giving rise to
unprecedented levels of violence with the gunning down of rival
dealers and innocent bystanders. It ensured obscene, untaxed profits
for traffickers and other racketeers. Further, drug overdoses, in the
form of bad bathtub gin, produced record numbers of hospital
admissions and deaths, directly attributable to the Volstead Act.

Thirteen years of alcohol prohibition turned out to be a colossal
failure. Its repeal in 1933 ushered in an era of government
regulation and control, of sanity and enhanced community safety.

But even if it makes economic sense to end drug prohibition, doesn't
legalization send the wrong message to our children? Not when we
consider that today our kids have greater access to illicit drugs (at
lower prices and higher potency than at any time in the history of
the drug war) than they do to alcohol and tobacco.

Doesn't it make more sense to have the government, imperfect as it
is, regulate and control these drugs, rather than leaving all
decisions in the hands of illicit traffickers?

And what message are we sending when year after year we pump tens of
billions of dollars into the $1 trillion drug war, only to make matters worse?

A regulated, legal industry would create the financial wherewithal to
sustain proven education and prevention programs, reduce drug abuse,
shrink kids' access to dangerous drugs, and provide treatment to
those many addicts who'd like nothing better than to kick their
illness. And to stop stealing scrap metal.